Search results for query: *

MH has been awfully quiet in the last couple of years. Is it possible that he finally realised he was ... wrong? That must have hurt the ego. Though it would have been even more hurt if only he realised how many of us were laughing at just how ridiculous and ill-founded his posturing was.

1. yes. 2. only indirectly - the basis of my opinion is the significant circumstantial evidence of a systematic doping regime. And by significant, I mean a f***ing truckload. Given they keep detailed records on every second of every player's training regime, conditioning and physical progress...

This last line, I feel compelled to paraphrase Ned Flanders: "I believe everything that Bomber says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff".

LOL, no circumstantial evidence? You moron.

But he initially went the other way and said "not banned". Different from not clearly banned, a situation that arose (as you suggest) due to the wriggle room allowed by an ASADA stuff up. It actually was banned, but people who should have known this as part of their job, didn't know it. So yes...

Didn't you see Jobe admit to taking AOD on national television, princess? And are you not aware of the simple concept of selectively producing records and destroying the ones that will prove guilt?

And yet they won't produce said records ... You'd have to be a ******* idiot if you believe no positive tests means innocence. Not producing records is far more damning that not failing tests because the program has been set up to ensure drugs tests won't be failed (just like every other...

Perhaps Bomber's view was "I was lucky to get away with this s**t once, no way am I risking being directly involved twice". I only wrote that because I saw you are Geelong supporter :thumbsu:

I think he's probably past the point of people thinking of him as an authoritative commentator. The good news for him is that being a buffoon every time you open your mouth does not preclude a long football media career. Exhibit A was seated right next to him.

Next week, of course, Bomber will deny that he stated Hird will not survive. It's been his MO this year, sniping Hird and the club and then backing off saying he's been misquoted.

It's on again at 10pm if anyone who missed it is keen for a look.

You're right of course. It is impossible to prove to the level of comfortable satisfaction that his use of Boomer in the pejorative is unoriginal and unfunny, notwithstanding it appears that way.

Ouch, so witty and original. Surely you didn't think of that yourself.

No, my friend, it is your level of delusion that is sad. Whether or not there is ever again a test for TB4 (I suggest there could well be, under the "where there's smoke ..." philosophy), WADA are testing for an outcome, yes - such outcome being locating proof of systematic cheating by taking...

LOL. I'd heard about you types. Never really believed they existed, though.

And when it doesn't, there'll be one less GWS poster on BigFooty. :thumbsu:

Haha, and that makes you a GWS supporter and the 50 odd posts a day on this thread are just a hobby. Actually, it's an appropriate metaphor to your posting in this thread. The above is representative of the sort of evidence that you seem to think will convince people of your contention...

No, not with me. I have almost zero interest in GWS. But strangely, you as a supporter haven't even discussed the big news on the GWS board (PS - I haven't even checked, but I'm right, aren't I?)

I'm disappointed that you have no interest in discussing your boy Toby. FYI, he's the one in your avatar.

Why is that absurd? You don't think untested, potentially dangerous, products should be regulated unless they are solely for the objective for performance enhancing? I agree with the notion that artificial performance enhancement is the key item to prevent, but it doesn't have to be the only one...

Yeah, this. The desperation dripping from his posts is embarrassing. Look, I understand what it is to love your football club and want to defend it to the death. On the other hand, I would hope that if I (North) was in the same situation, I would be rational about it. Oh, and I would NEVER...

Aka the “I’m not going to dignify that with a response” defence. Not a very sound strategy in actual legal proceedings. But Martie avoids the real thing, anyway.

Surely they are just a couple of unrelated NSW-club supporting guys, coming here with independent, unbiased evaluations of the doping case? :thumbsu: Only Essendon supporters will be praying that neither (sic) of them is anywhere near advising the club, as running with their denial-based...

Me neither.

Did LOL at the bolded bit. :thumbsu:

As a betting man, I'd happily take odds on for the comfortable satisfaction standard being met. Stating it's not specifically listed is yet another one of their insipid attempts at getting off on a technicality.

You just run with that, Martie. :thumbsu:

Hey, hey, as a North supporter I may be dumb and completely aligned, but I ... um, what was the third thing you said? (with apologies to Moe - Hurricane Neddie)

This might explain the lengths they have gone to in covering up - destroyed evidence, bogus legal action, etc.

It’s obvious that you’re trying to help. You’re just hiding who you’re trying to help ... Lead off with some well synthesised but publicly available facts, tantalise with the promise of more, and invite others to reach their own conclusions, whilst subtlely pushing them to the conclusion you...